NYC Court Holds Stun Guns are NOT Protected by Second Amendment

AmmoLand ^ | March 29, 2025 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

Judge Eduardo Ramos, the U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of New York,  has issued an Opinion & Order that a ban on stun guns is constitutional. A New York State law prohibits the private possession of stun guns and tasers; a New York City law prohibits the possession and selling of stun guns. Judge Ramos has ruled these laws do not infringe on rights protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.

The case is Calce v. City of New York, filed in October of 2021.  Ramos’ court is the first court to conclude that stun guns have not been established as “arms” covered by the text of the Second Amendment, since the Supreme Court rebuked the Massachusetts Supreme Court in the Caetano case. In Caetano, the Court unanimously held that:

The Court has held that “the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,” District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570, 582 (2008) , and that this “ Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States,” McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742, 750 (2010)

Prima facie means “on its face”.  The Supreme Court, in the three cases of Heller, McDonald, and Caetano, has repeatedly stated the text of the Second Amendment extends to all instruments that constitute bearable arms.  The statement is very clear. It goes back to the establishment of what the words in the text of the Second Amendment mean. In Heller, the meaning of “arms” is established by reference to the dictionary definition at the time:

Before addressing the verbs “keep” and “bear,” we interpret their object: “Arms.” The 18th-century meaning is no different from the meaning today.

[marktwain]

Judge Ramos writes an opinion in which it appears he believes it is duty to restrict the Second Amendment as much as he can.

[Larry Lucido]

I’m stunned.

[Red Badger]

I’m stuned......................

[Qwapisking]

so right you are. it’s truly stunning that every stinkin’ liberal judge is out to disarm every single law abiding American in every diabolical way possible. IF you are attacked by the criminal element but cannot legally protect yourself...thank a democrat.

[Jonty30]

So, he wants the only alternative to a gun to be a gun.

Got it.

[Larry Lucido]

Beabers are protected.

[Larry Lucido]

Indeed.

[jimfree]

Geez. A stick is protected under 1A when used or intended to be used as “armament”.

[FLT-bird]

It doesn’t matter what they hold. SCOTUS has already ruled they are protected by the 2nd amendment. Anybody in NY attempting to infringe on the rights of US Citizens to have them is subject to prosecution by the DOJ.

[Big Red Badger]

Shocked I tell You ...
SHOCKED!

[FlingWingFlyer]

Another out of control foreigner “judgey”. The Feral District courts would make a great sitcom. A bunch of clowns.

[vikingd00d]

If tazers aren’t arms then tazing the judge for fun isn’t assault and battery, correct? Asking for a friend...

[Big Red Badger]

They are Called “Stun Guns”
Not Cattle Prods or Electric Fences.

I feel stupid and contagious in a fallen world.

[Big Red Badger]

Nice...

[Red Badger]

[Leaning Right]

> If tazers aren’t arms then tazing the judge for fun isn’t assault and battery, correct? <

I think it would fall in the same category as giving someone a wedgie.

[Big Red Badger]

It’s just Gas.

[RandallFlagg]

Wikipedia link
...sigh...

[SecondAmendment]

I am convulsing in agony.

[Openurmind]

More legalizing crime while outlawing self defense. Population reduction.